← Home
Select Works of Plotinus · 699 of 752 · tr. Thomas Taylor

Select Works, Section 667

Section 28 28. Now to see what all this reasoning has established: Universally, what approaches as a good is a Form; Matter itself contains this good which is Form: are we to conclude that, if Matter had will, it would desire to be Form unalloyed? No: that would be desiring its own destruction, for the good seeks to subject everything to itself. But perhaps Matter would not wish to remain at its own level but would prefer to attain Being and, this acquired, to lay aside its evil. If we are asked how the evil thing can have tendency towards the good, we answer that we have not attributed tendency to Matter; our argument needed the hypothesis of sensation in Matter- in so far as possible consistently with retention of its character- and we asserted that the entry of Form, that dream of the Good, must raise it to a nobler order. If then Matter is Evil, there is no more to be said; if it is something else- a wrong thing, let us say- then in the hypothesis that its essence acquire sensation would not the appropriate upon the next or higher plane be its good, as in the other cases? But not what is evil in Matter would be the quester of good but that element in it [lowest Form] which in it is associated with evil. But if Matter by very essence is evil how could it choose the good? This question implies that if Evil were self-conscious it would admire itself: but how can the unadmirable be admired; and did we not discover that the good must be apt to the nature? There that question may rest. But if universally the good is Form and the higher the ascent the more there is of Form-Soul more truly Form than body is and phases of soul progressively of higher Form and Intellectual-Principle standing as Form to soul collectively- then the Good advances by the opposite of Matter and, therefore, by a cleansing and casting away to the utmost possible at each stage: and the greatest good must be there where all that is of Matter has disappeared. The Principle of Good rejecting Matter entirely- or rather never having come near it at any point or in any way- must hold itself aloft with that Formless in which Primal Form takes its origin. But we will return to this.
Themes
Monadcosmology

The absolutely simple, undivided first principle from which all multiplicity and existence flows.

The reference to a singular origin 'Thence' implies the first principle from which existence and goodness flow.

All passages →
Unity Of Beingtheology

The doctrine that all existence is ultimately one substance or one divine reality; non-duality as a theological claim.

The assertion that derived things possess goodness from their origin implies an ontological connection or unity between the source and the effect.

All passages →
Emanation Hierarchycosmology

A chain of divine beings or principles flowing downward from a single transcendent source (the One or the Father), each level less perfect than the one above.

[auto] The passage explicitly discusses things deriving from a higher realm and questions the mode of this derivation, which is central to the concept of emanation.

All passages →
Related passages · 7 parallels
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 4, Section 1r
Now we will bid the questioner look towards the truth of things, and in the first place we will venture thus to answer: “Evil cometh not of the Good; and if it cometh therefrom it is not evil. For even as fire cannot cool us, so Good canno…”
Both passages explore the nature of evil and its relationship to the good, with a focus on the idea that evil is not a substantive entity but rather a lack or corruption of the good. They both argue that evil cannot be a source of creation or existence, but rather a degradation of what is good.
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 4, Section 1s
And if any one says that it is productive, and that by the destruction of one thing it giveth birth to somewhat else, the true answer is that it doth not so qua destructive. Qua destructive and evil it only destroys and debases; but it tak…”
Both passages explore the relationship between good and evil, and the nature of evil as a lack of good. They discuss how evil is not a substantive force but rather a privation that can only exist in relation to the good. Both texts also emphasize the role of the Good in giving being and power to all things, including those that seem evil.
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 4, Section 1v
cannot be free from pain, nor without a feeling of ill, since there would be something causing Him trouble, yea, all things must in that case be in a state of disorder and perpetual strife; whereas the Good imparts a principle of harmony to…”
Both passages explore the nature of good and evil, and the relationship between matter and form (or essence). They discuss how evil is not inherent in the ultimate good or divine principle, and how the good seeks to elevate or purify what is evil.
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 4, Section 1z
And if they say that matter is necessary for the whole world to fulfil its development, how can that be evil which depends for its existence upon the Good? For evil abhors the very nature of the Good. And how can matter, if it is evil, pr…”
Both passages explore the nature of evil and its relationship with the Good, particularly in the context of matter and soul. They both argue that evil is not an inherent or necessary part of existence but rather a deviation or lack of the Good.
christian_mysticism|Pseudo-Dionysius: The Divine Names|Chapter 4, Section 1{
127 There remains but one alternative: Evil is a weakness and deficiency of Good. 31. Good things have all one cause. If evil is opposed to the Good, then hath evil many causes. The efficient causes of evil results, however, are not any…”
Both passages explore the nature of evil and its relationship to the good, positing that evil is a lack or deficiency of the good. They share a conceptual framework that views evil as something that seeks the good, albeit in a flawed or imperfect manner.
platonism|Plato: Republic|Section 1m
Yes, I said, that they should begin by reproaching us with our ignorance of the good, and then presume our knowledge of it-- for the good they define to be knowledge of the good, just as if we understood them when they use the term `good'--…”
Both passages explore the nature of the good and its relationship to knowledge and reality. They discuss the pursuit of the good and the difficulties in defining it, showing a conceptual parallel in their philosophical inquiries.
platonism|Plato: Republic|Section 1n
And you would say the same of the conception of the good? Until the person is able to abstract and define rationally the idea of good, and unless he can run the gauntlet of all objections, and is ready to disprove them, not by appeals to o…”
Both passages explore the nature of the good and the aspiration towards it. Plotinus discusses the desire of Matter to attain Being and the Good, while Plato's dialogue in the Republic emphasizes the importance of understanding the idea of the good through dialectic and rational inquiry. Both texts highlight the transformative power of the good and the necessity of striving towards it.